Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!tektronix!tekgen!tekigm2!neals
From: neals@tekigm2.TEK.COM (Neal Sedell)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.m6809
Subject: Re: Age of BLOB
Message-ID: <3811@tekigm2.TEK.COM>
Date: 16 Nov 88 20:59:08 GMT
References: <8811071544.AA29817@decwrl.dec.com> <16634@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <3783@tekigm2.TEK.COM> <1988Nov11.143346.6168@cs.rochester.edu>
Reply-To: neals@tekigm2.TEK.COM (Neal Sedell)
Distribution: na
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.
Lines: 20

In article <1988Nov11.143346.6168@cs.rochester.edu> dibble@cs.rochester.edu (Peter C. Dibble) writes:
>I have never experienced any form of boot list order bug on any of my hardware
>and many years of running OS-9.(*)  
>This doesn't entirely rule out the possibliity
>that it is a software bug, but I'd certainly lean towards hardware until
>strong evidence appears.
>
>The hardware timing explanation sounded reasonable to me.  Is there reason to
>question it?

Okay.  Good thing I left a disclaimer in my armchair analysis!  I haven't been
involved with OS-9 other than with the COCO, and I do know that OS-9 runs
on lots of other systems, but I just kind of forgot....

This pretty much points to a hardware problem.  What exactly is COCO
specific other than the boot itself and of course the i/o drivers??? 
Perhaps Mr. Jones could provide the definitive answer (hint hint - it
wouldn't even have to be "official".)
-- 
Neal Sedell